Background
According to Yin and Fang (2010), Google China was introduced in China in 2006 and after three years, its revenue in China had doubled. This was attributed to Google’s advanced product innovation and its outstanding technological framework. In 2009, online advertising was mainly through two of its products: ADsense and Adwords (Davis, 2006, p. 152).
These products increased the company’s profit margin immensely. In addition, this outstanding revenue triggered Google to launch some popular applications such as Google Calendar, Google Talk, and Google Docs among others. To operate these products, Google had to pump colossus revenue into developing internet-based infrastructure. This resulted to millions of servers and billions of search requests being processed daily.
The internet search industry in China has been characterized by rapid growth and stiff rivalry. Other players in the market have been Baidu, Yahoo, Sohu, and Sina. Baidu and Google dominated the largest percentage of the market especially in 2008. While in China, Google put in place mechanisms for its growth.
These entail investment in its Research and Development, development and expansion of its sales team, devising a primary search product and developing partnerships with other firms. This enabled the company to enlarge its market share in China. In addition, the company also launched some other services to support the search function.
While in china, Google faced several hurdles such as delayed licensing from the China government, accusations for use of pornography in its search words, copyright violation tussles with Chinese writers and censorship resulting to suspension of its internet services. As MacKinnon (2006) explains, Google had some problems with the China government in 2002 that had seen the latter block the company’s search engine.
This went on until later in 2009 when Google officially announced several security concerns especially on some of its Chinese Gmail accounts. Earlier this year (2010), there was much discussion and evaluation of the reported incident and its implications especially towards the future of Google in China.
Introduction
Google is one of the largest internet based companies globally. A few years back, it introduced its operations in China, one of the world’s fastest growing economies. While there, there were opportunities for growth just like there were challenges.
The greatest of such challenges is the Chinese government’s censorship of internet search results. This work assesses the environment surrounding Google in china, looks at the strategy taken by the company in response to security assaults to its operations and its feasibility and sustainability.
Cultural Web
According to Jeffs (2008), “the cultural web was designed by Gerry Johnson and Kevan Scholes in the year 1992,” and it enables one to have not only an understanding of their organization’s culture, but also an opportunity to change it.
It encompasses seven key areas: stories, symbols, power structures, organizational structure, control systems, routine and rituals, and the paradigm (Jeffs, 2008. P. 70). Below is a table showing Google China’s cultural web.
Stakeholder Power Matrix
Stakeholders are people who play a significant role in an organization with respect to decision-making. Although Google has a flat hierarchy, its founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin make most of the company’s key decisions (Wahla, 2006, p.19).
The Company’s decision to physically get into the Chinese territory was managed by Tom MacLean who was then the director of the Company’s international business (Martin, 2008, P. 2).
Although, part of the Google’s mission is to allow its users to access global information (Miller, 2007, p. 10), the Chinese government’s censorship on search results posed a challenge to the execution of the power that emanates from the Google’s top authority.
The decision to stop censorship of its search results in China and the possibility of reviewing its business operations in China was purely a decision of Google’s United States executives (Ying and Fang, 2010, p.6).
Ansoff Matrix
This is a method of categorizing the four basic approaches of product marketing, which entails market penetration, market enlargement, product development, and diversification (Statt, 2004, p.5). The Ansoff matrix for Google is summarized in the table below.
BCG Matrix
As Griffin (2006) explains, the BCG matrix enables managers to analyze strategies related to the business and its products which is determined by two major aspects, which are the rate at which the market grows and the portion of the market occupied by the company.
As Schermerhorn (2010) highlights, matrix places the industry or products into four strategic categories: Dogs, stars, question marks and cash cows. Google’s BCG matrix is summarized in the table below.
Product Portfolio Analysis
In 2006, Google devised the currently famous products: Picasa web album, Google Docs, Google Talk, Google calendar and Google checkout. A mobile operation system, Android was launched in 2008. It was found to compete closely to Apple’s iphone platform. Both Google translate and Google chrome was released during the same time.
In 2009, 97% of Google’s total income came from its advertising products: Google AdWords and AdSense. This two also dominated a larger portion of the United States market. Additionally, in an attempt to compete Baidu, Google launched some services that could support its search function. These include Google Earth, Google Hot list, Q&A and a free music download.
On the other hand, the Google’s Gmail product was attacked by hackers. As Arthur (2010), puts it, internet explorer (6) is susceptible to attacks and is the one that Google has been using. The company announced a change in its infrastructure after the attacks.
Current State of the Industry and strategic direction
There have been reported series of attacks on the company’s infrastructure leading to theft of intellectual property. Primarily, the Chinese Human Rights advocates have been the mostly affected. However, Google China has been more aggressive to counter this challenge by enhancing security measures for its accountholders.
The information deserved a broad audience due to its implications on security, human rights, and freedom of speech. The attacks and the limit of free speech on the net led to a conclusion that requires a review of Google’s feasibility in China.
This includes not subjecting the company’s search engine results to censorship and deliberations with the Chinese government on the possibility of operating unfiltered search engine within the law. Although the company’s search engine was closed for a few days in China, it was active again, but still bringing censorship results. As Physorg (2010) reports, Google had to exit China by April 10 2010.
Conclusion
Google’s current strategy to seek dialogue with the China government to be allowed to continue operating without being censored may be futile.
This is because the Chinese government may regard it as a direct infringement on its democracy by the United States, which will further stifle the possibility of doing business in China. Therefore, the strategy is not sustainable as long as it seeks to be non-compliant with the Chinese government rules.
Recommendation
Although as Scott (2008), explains, Google’s mission is to enable its users to access global information, it may be prudent for the company to adjust this within the China setting if it has to continue operating there due to censorship policies. Since as Jeffs (2008) reports, the company’s structure allows it to be client centered. The customers in China are so many and it is necessary for Google to accept censorship and continue serving them.
Secondly, the company should explore the possibility of collaborating with Baidu to help it retain its China market. This is because among all its rivals in China, Baidu is the best performing economically. The company still has a strong social backing from China due to numerous internet users.
Thirdly, Google should adjust its political astuteness with the Chinese government by taking a low political profile and yet being business active. This may help it continue operating in China like other western-based organizations.
Fourthly, as suggested by Fatokimi (2010), given that China is one of the greatest global growing economies, Google should consider succumbing to China’s regulations and retain this market while being an enormous investment for its shareholders. By doing so, the company will generate more income, keep business and retain workers.
Fifthly, Google needs to change the supplier of its browsing version to use the one that is more secure. Lastly, more investment in Research and Development is recommended to ensure that the company’s product quality exceeds that of its rivals to counter competition especially from Baidu.
Moreover, as suggested in Law 360 (2010), like any other American company, Google can only retain its operation and market in China by being patient with the Chinese government. That means being active economically but taking a low profile in active politics.
Appendix. Summary of Environmental Audit
SWOT analysis
This refers to the Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of a given Company. As Glossbrenner (2001) argues, emergence of Google as one of the best global search engines must be due to its strength. This is summarized in the table below.
PEST Analysis
This analysis aims at evaluating how the political, economic, social, and technological analyses have affected Google in China. Politically, the company’s operation has been curtailed by censorship of its services from the China government. An attack of Chinese human rights activists’ Gmail accounts may also indicate political instability. Google recorded good economic growth between 2006 and 2009.
This can be attributed to the company’s extensive use of advertising, and other social aspects like high Chinese population hence increased demand and increased internet usage of China citizens as part of their recreational activity.
Technologically, Google’s innovation and development of internet infrastructure led to the growth not only in its products, but also in its revenue. As Yin and Fang (2010) explain, Google’s market share in China also grew due to its extensive engagement in Research and development.
Pest Analysis Summary
Porter’s Five Model
In looking at the nature of external environment surrounding Google, the Porters five forces model becomes handy. According to Learn Marketing.Net (2010), the porters five forces model has five components: Competitive rivalry, power of suppliers, power of buyers, threat of substitute, and threat of new entrants.
Google’s competitive rivalry is high because first, it is costly for it to pull out the Chinese market since doing this will mean losing about $300 million of its annual revenue. This is apart from plunging thousands of its Chinese employees into unemployment (Robles, 2010 cited in Ying and Fang, 2010).
Secondly, competitive rivalry is high because given the uncertainties surrounding Google’s operation in China, a close rival; Baidu.com has already occupied more than half of the market share. It has also designed a unique product that suits the needs of the Chinese and the unmatched pay-for-performance marketing service (Ying and Fang, 2010).
Information Gatekeepers Inc. (2007) reveals that, various companies have expressed their willingness to supply Google Company in China with materials that it may require to boost its performance by purchasing both system equipment and mobile handsets. Such companies include Alcatel, Ericson, Nortel and Siemens.
It is also reported that the Google Company in China is willing to be supplied with equipment from international recording companies. This is to help it offer copyrighted music online. This move is plausible since it will enable Google in China share its profits with these companies.
The threat of substitute for the Google Company in China is high. This is because its closest rival – Baidu offers very competitive products to the Chinese citizens. This includes not only its affordable pay-for-performance marketing service, but also its unique search engine product that has been tailor made to suit the clients needs.
This is already a threat to Google’s market in China since Baidu is also China-based and as such preferred by most customers. Lastly, the threat of a new company entering into the Chinese market is low. This is because the Chinese government does not warrant uncensored internet based businesses.
Most search engine providers would want to operate in a business environment that is free from barriers so that they can penetrate a wider market. In a study by Inc Icon group International (2008), both Germany and France gave up their plans to penetrate the China market.
Components of Porters five Model and how they affect Google
The Suitability, Acceptability, and Feasibility of the Google’s strategy
The current state of Google in China is still the way it was announced by some of its officials earlier this year. There have been reported series of attacks on the company’s infrastructure leading to theft of intellectual property.
Primarily, the Chinese Human Rights advocates have been the mostly affected; however, Google China has been more aggressive to counter this challenge by enhancing security measures for its Gmail account holders. The information deserved a broad audience due to its implications on security, human rights, and freedom of speech.
The attacks and the limit of free speech on the net led to a conclusion that requires a review of Google’s feasibility in China. As stated by Allen (2010), hacking and a security related rift between Google and the Chinese government poses the uncertainty of closure of the Google Company that may lead to losses to the company and unemployment.
As Physorg (2010) reports, Google had to exit China by April 10 2010. Thus, the acceptability of the Company’s operation in China is only possible if the Google’s executives accept censorship of its search results.
Assessment of current strategy (Sustainability)
Google’s current strategy to seek dialogue with the China government to be allowed to continue operating without being censored may be futile.
This is because the Chinese government may regard it as a direct infringement on its democracy by the United States, which will further stifle the possibility of doing business in China. Therefore, the strategy is not sustainable as long as it seeks to be non-compliant with the Chinese government’s rules.
References
Allen, E., 2010. The Houston Chronicle: Doomed marriage: Google’s China problem shows repression and free speech do not mix. Web.
Arthur, C., 2010. UK ignores fears over Internet Explorer despite French and German warnings. Guardian News and media. Web.
Davis, H., 2006. Google advertising tools. Sebastopol: O’Reilly media.Inc. Web.
Fatokimi, T. et al. 2010. Google in China case study. Slide share Inc. Web.
Glossbrenner, A., 2001. Search Engines for the World Wide Web. Berkeley: Peachpit press. Web.
Griffin, R. W., 2006. Management. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Web.
Information Gatekeepers Inc. 2007. China Telecom Newsletter. Beijing: Information Gate Keepers Inc. Web.
Jeffs, C., 2008. Strategic Management. London: Sage Publications. Web.
Law 360. 2010. 3 lessons from Google’s China fiasco. New York: Portfolio media. Inc. Web.
Learn Marketing. 2010. Porter’s Five Forces Model: Industry Analysis Model. Web.
MacKinnon, R., 2006. CHINA – “Race to the Bottom” Corporate Complicity in Chinese Internet Censorship. Beijing: Human Rights Watch. Web.
Martin, K. E., (2008). Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics: Google. Inc. in China. Web.
Miller, M., 2007. Googlepedia: The Ultimate Google Resource. United States: Pearson Technology Group. Web.
Physorg. 2010. Google to leave China April 10: State Media. Web.
Schermerhorn, J. R., 2010. Management. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons. Web.
Scott, V., 2008. Google: Google Controversies. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group. Web.
Statt, D. A., 2004. The Routledge dictionary of business management. London: Routledge. Web.
Wahla, S., 2006. Litigation@Google. Lulu. Web.
Yin, M. and Fang, Y., 2010. Google in China. Beijing: Richard Ivey Foundation of Business Foundation. (Attached material).